Farmer v. The County of Westchester
- 7:18-cv-02691
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Farmer v. The County of Westchester, the court dismissed the complaint and closed the case.
Tyrone Farmer’s Second Amended Complaint was dismissed in its entirety. The County of Westchester and the City of Peekskill defendants obtained dismissal, and Farmer was denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
What happened
In Farmer v. The County of Westchester, Tyrone Farmer sued the County of Westchester, the City of Peekskill, and several named and unnamed individuals. The judgment identifies Farmer as representing himself.
The court granted the County and City defendants’ motions to dismiss and dismissed Farmer’s Second Amended Complaint in its entirety without leave to replead. The court also denied him permission to proceed without paying fees on appeal, certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, entered judgment, and closed the case.
The judgment is signed by the clerk of court, and it does not identify the judge who issued the underlying August 30, 2022 opinion and order. The court’s reasons are not included in the provided text.
The detailed version
- Farmer v. The County of Westchester · No. 7:18-cv-02691
- Sept. 1, 2022
Background
Tyrone Farmer brought the case against the County of Westchester, the City of Peekskill, Eric Johansen, Pamela Sgroi, a Jane or John Doe access officer, Sgt. Henderlong, Officer Vazeo, and Officer Sean Echols. The judgment states that Farmer was representing himself and that he had filed a Second Amended Complaint.
Ruling
The court granted the County and City defendants’ motions to dismiss. It dismissed the Second Amended Complaint in its entirety without leave to replead, meaning the judgment did not authorize another amended complaint in this case. The judgment states that the reasons were provided in the court’s Opinion & Order dated August 30, 2022, but that opinion is not included in the supplied text.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. As a result, it denied permission to appeal without paying the required filing fees. Judgment was entered and the case was closed.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court ruled on motions to dismiss rather than deciding the underlying claims on their merits. The provided judgment does not state the specific grounds for dismissal.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.